Omagh Victims' Legal Action Group Letter

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether the Home Secretary received a plea from relations of those murdered in the Real IRA bombing of Omagh in August 1998 asking that any new anti-terrorism legislation should ensure that the Real IRA associates can no longer fund-raise in the United Kingdom; and if so, what was his response.

Lord Rooker: Consultation on the Criminal Justice (Terrorism and Conspiracy) Act 1998 and the Terrorism Act 2000 received a number of responses. None was directly concerned with fundraising by the Real IRA and its associates. However, my right honourable friend the Home Secretary has recently received a letter from the Omagh Victims' Legal Action Group on broadly similar issues which is receiving his urgent attention.

House of Lords Membership

Baroness Blatch: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether it is planned to appoint any life Peers ahead of the proposed reform of the House of Lords and whether further Peers are expected to be appointed on the recommendation of the House of Lords Appointments Commission ahead of the reforms.

Lord Irvine of Lairg: The membership of the House of Lords, including that of non-party political Peers, is kept under ongoing review.

Freedom of Information Act Training

Lord Lester of Herne Hill: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What arrangements have been made for the training of Ministers and civil servants to give effect to the Freedom of Information Act 2000; and what is the timetable for the training programme between now and January 2005.

Lord Irvine of Lairg: The Centre for Management and Policy Studies in the Cabinet Office has arranged a seminar for Ministers on the implications of the Freedom of Information Act for 29 January 2002. Following on from this seminar, starting on 4 February, Michael Wills MP, a Parliamentary Secretary in the Lord Chancellor's Department, will be leading a series of road-shows around the country to raise awareness of the Act at a strategic level in public authorities. Members of the Advisory Group on Implementation will also be involved in the events, as will senior officials in the Lord Chancellor's Department.
	These sessions will run until the end of April 2002. Details of dates and locations will be advertised in January. A further series of events will be held in the autumn of next year to address the need for more in-depth information and training on freedom of information.
	Each public authority is responsible for training its own officials and will be influenced by departmental needs and the recommendations of the interdepartmental officials groups and the Advisory Group on Implementation. Officials in the Freedom of Information and Data Protection Division in my department (formerly the Home Office) regularly undertake awareness-raising seminars in a wide range of departments, including the Cabinet Office, the Home Office, the Department of Health, the Office of National Statistics, and the Northern Ireland Civil Service, as well as in my department. These officials have also participated in courses at the Civil Service College, the Local Government Group at the Law Society and conferences arranged by other organisations.
	Further details on culture change, training and awareness, including departmental case studies, appear in my report to Parliament on the implementation of the Act of 29 November 2001.

Third Paris Airport: Somme Battlefield

Lord Morris of Manchester: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What consultation the French Government had with them and with ex-service organisations in the United Kingdom prior to announcing the decision to build a third Paris airport on a Somme battlefield where British war graves are sited; and what action they have taken or are considering taking.

Lord Bach: The French Government have made no representations to Her Majesty's Government about a proposed new airport for Paris. At this stage the matter is entirely the responsibility of the French authorities. However, following media speculation about the possibility that First World War cemeteries containing some British and Commonwealth casualties may be affected if the project goes ahead, the Commonwealth War Graves Commission, which is responsible for the maintenance of the graves, has written to the French Ministry of the Interior seeking further clarification of the proposals. It has drawn attention to the concern expressed in the UK and has asked to be kept informed of any developments.

Export Credits and Credit Guarantees

The Earl of Sandwich: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What progress has been made by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development Working Party on Export Credits and Credit Guarantees; and what specific conclusions they have reached on environmental review and impact assessment.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: At the November 2001 meeting in Paris of the OECD Working Party on Export Credits and Credit Guarantees an informal and voluntary agreement to raise environmental standards for capital goods exports was reached between 24 of the 26 OECD export credit agencies (ECAs). The USA and Turkey—for different reasons—were unable to support the agreement. The agreement's provisions will be implemented with effect from 1 January 2002.
	The UK played a leading role in securing this agreement, to be known as Common Approaches on the Environment and Officially Supported Export Credits (The Agreement on Common Approaches), which has for the first time created a level playing field in terms of environmental impact analysis in the field of capital goods exports.
	The main points of the agreement are:
	An obligation for ECAs to screen all applications for support of projects and project related capital goods in order to identify and review those which may have an adverse environmental impact (including resettlement, indigenous or vulnerable groups and cultural heritage).
	Procedures under which ECAs would classify projects according to their sensitivity to help ensure a thorough environmental review, including a full environmental impact appraisal for sensitive sectors and locations before decisions are taken.
	An obligation to compare or benchmark the projects against international standards such as those contained in the guidelines of the World Bank Group. Projects that did not comply with these standards would need to be fully justified. In addition ECAs would need to explain any departures from international standards through reporting and transparency procedures.
	Obligations to encourage the dissemination of information relating to environmental impacts, subject to national legal provisions on public disclosure.
	Robust reporting provisions which will assist in a review of the recommendation no later than the end of 2003 with the aim of "enhancing it in the light of experience".
	We shall continue to work towards an agreement which all parties can support.

Export Credits and the Environment: US Decision

Baroness Miller of Chilthorne Domer: asked Her Majesty's Government
	What reasons were given by the United States when it decided not to join the 24 other Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development countries who reached agreement on Common Approaches to the Environment and Officially Supported Export Credits.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: At the November 2001 meeting of the OECD's Export Credit Group, the United States was unable to agree to support the recommendation on Common Approaches to the Environment and Officially Supported Export Credits, principally because it did not explicitly require that:
	1. All Export Credit Agency (ECA) supported projects comply with the more stringent of the host country standards or the environmental standards of the World Bank Group; or that
	2. ECAs make public environmental impact information relating to projects being reviewed by ECAs before the ECA reaches its decision on supporting a project.
	The UK played a key role in securing widespread support among the other OECD member states for an informal agreement which has for the first time created a level playing field in terms of environmental impact analysis in the field of capital goods exports.
	This agreement sets clear guidelines on the use of international standards as benchmarks. For a number of reasons, however, including legal constraints in some countries, it encourages rather than makes mandatory the advance public disclosure of environmental impact information.
	The agreement on common approaches is a significant beginning and we hope that the coming months will see our US colleagues in a position to join the agreement and take part in its review and development.

Export Credits and the Environment: US Decision

Baroness Miller of Chilthorne Domer: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What percentage of officially supported export credits in the world market are those of the United States.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: This information is only held by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) on the basis of statistical returns made confidentially by OECD countries which are members of the Working Party on Export Credits. We are not at liberty to disclose this information.

Afghanistan

Lord Avebury: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What progress has been made with the de facto authorities in Afghanistan towards reaching agreement on the use of troops from Muslim countries in helping to maintain law and order.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: The Bonn agreement stipulates that an interim authority will be set up in Afghanistan on 22 December. When they have assumed office it will be important for them to discuss their security requirements with willing nations, including Muslim countries.

Human Rights Dialogues

Lord Avebury: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will urge the Belgian Presidency of the European Union that the guidelines they are drawing up on the question of human rights dialogues with third countries should first be published in draft so that the comments of human rights non-governmental organisations and national parliaments of member states can be sought before the guidelines are finalised.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: The EU guidelines on human rights dialogues were agreed at Council on 13 December. The preparation of these guidelines was among the issues discussed at the EU Human Rights Forum in Brussels on 21–22 November, attended by human rights non-governmental organisations and Members of the European Parliament. The implementation of these and other EU guidelines on human rights issues will be the subject of continuing discussion among member states, non-governmental organisations, parliamentarians and other interested parties.

Malawi

Baroness Stern: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they have raised with the Government of Malawi the actions of the Malawi Parliament on 14 November in recommending that Judges Mwaungulu, Chimasula Phiri and Chipeta be removed from office.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: We and other international partners have raised this issue with the president and others in the Government of Malawi. We understand President Muluzi has decided Justice Chipeta has no case to answer and has referred the cases of the other two judges to the Judicial Service Commission.

Biological and Toxin Weapons

Lord Judd: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What is their evaluation of developments at the fifth review conference in Geneva of the states parties to the 1975 Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention; and what consequent action they will be taking.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: Her Majesty's Government regret that it was necessary to suspend the Biological Weapons Review Conference as it was not possible to reach a consensus on the continuation of a multilateral negotiating forum. It was agreed that the conference would reconvene in Geneva from 11 to 22 November next year. The United Kingdom will use the intervening period to consult widely with all states parties in order to determine the best way forward. We remain committed to achieving a binding agreement that will reinforce the international norm against biological weapons.

China: Human Rights Dialogue

Lord Avebury: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How they are co-ordinating the United Kingdom-China human rights dialogue with other national and European Union-China human rights dialogues; and, in particular, what common policies they have formulated on the treatment of the Falun Gong.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: There is no formal co-ordination between the UK and other countries which have human rights dialogues with China. On two occasions we have met informally with Switzerland, Canada, Australia, Japan, Hungary, Norway and the EU, all of which engage in a regular human rights dialogue with China.
	There is no common policy on the treatment of the Falun Gong.

Burma

Lord Avebury: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will raise with the Government of Myanmar the cases of former members of parliament elected in 1990 and now detained for political reasons, as detailed in reports of the Inter-Parliamentary Union.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: HMG fully support the aims of the IPU in seeking the release of the MPs elect from the 1990 elections in Burma. We will continue to take every opportunity to press for the release of all political prisoners. This takes the form of bilateral action, co-ordinated action with EU partners and also as co-sponsors of UN resolutions.

Kabul: Diplomatic Representation

Lord Acton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether there have been any recent changes to the British diplomatic representation in Kabul.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: Following discussions with the incoming interim administration, we expect to renew diplomatic relations with Afghanistan on 22 December and to redesignate the Office of the British Representative in Kabul as an embassy, headed by a charge d'affaires. We last had permanent diplomatic representation in Kabul in 1989. We did not have normal government to government dealings with the Taliban regime.

Data Protection Act Exemptions

Baroness Howells of St Davids: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether any certificates have recently been signed under Section 28 of the Data Protection Act 1998 covering personal data processed by the Secret Intelligence Services and Government Communications Headquarters.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: On 8 December the Foreign Secretary revoked Data Protection Act exemption certificates dated 30 July 2000 and issued new ones. Copies of the new certificates, and a statement outlining the reasoning behind their issue, have been placed in the Library of the House.

Reciprocal Student Support

Baroness Sharp of Guildford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will list countries with whom reciprocal arrangements with the United Kingdom have been made regarding student support in higher education.

Baroness Ashton of Upholland: The UK has reciprocal arrangements with each of the member states of the European Union under EC Directive 93/96. This requires a host state to guarantee "access to vocational training in a non-discriminatory manner". In practice this means that UK nationals attending undergraduate courses in the EU are entitled to equal treatment as "home" students, as are EU students in the UK. However, this only applies to tuition fee support. There is no requirement on a member state to provide grants or loans for maintenance to nationals from other member states.

Reciprocal Student Support

Baroness Sharp of Guildford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will list higher education establishments external to the United Kingdom at which there is financial support for United Kingdom students attending courses there.

Baroness Ashton of Upholland: Students are eligible for tuition fee support and a student loan for undergraduate courses at the British Institute in Paris, France. Students studying on the Erasmus programme are not liable to pay tuition fees but are entitled to a student loan and can receive a grant towards the extra expenses involved in studying abroad. The Erasmus programme is a European funded student mobility scheme, which is part of Socrates, the European Community education programme. The member states of the European Economic Area (EEA) all participate in the Erasmus scheme and students will be at various locations and institutions within EEA. In addition, my department provides maintenance support and/or tuition fee support, depending on the institution, to students attending a number of postgraduate courses at three European institutions: the European University Institute in Florence, Italy, the College of Europe in Bruges, Belgium and the Bologna Center in Bologna, Italy.

Reciprocal Student Support

Baroness Sharp of Guildford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will list courses at higher education institutions external to the United Kingdom for which students from the United Kingdom can receive financial support.

Baroness Ashton of Upholland: The British Institute in Paris offers a three-year BA (Honours) in French Studies. It has a year abroad programme for undergraduates from other UK universities who need to spend a year, a semester or a term in an academic environment in France as part of their course.
	Those undertaking study as part of the Erasmus (European Community Action Scheme for the Mobility of University Students) programme are enrolled on courses covering the entire range of a university's academic programmes.
	Students at the European University Institute undertake postgraduate study and research in one of four departments: economics, law, history and civilisation or political and social sciences. Most students undertake a three-year doctorate, but there are some students who undertake a one-year Masters in Law.
	College of Europe students follow a one-year course and enrol in one of four departments: economics, human resource development, political sciences or administrative sciences. All follow a compulsory programme of European general and interdisciplinary studies.
	Students at the Bologna Center study an interdisciplinary course, including a modern language, international economics, international relations and European studies.

School Value Added Measures

Lord Lucas: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What correlation they observe between the key stage 2 to key stage 3 value added measure and the key stage 3 to GCSE value added measure published in the pilot value added tables last month.

Baroness Ashton of Upholland: The correlation between the key stage 2 to key stage 3 value added measures and the key stage 3 to GCSE/GNVQ value added measure for the 200 pilot schools with both measures was +0.26.
	Any interpretation of this correlation should take into account that the value added measures have been calculated for two separate cohorts of pupils.

School Value Added Measures

Lord Lucas: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What correlation they observe between the key stage 2 to GCSE value added measures published in the pilot value added measures last month and (a) raw GCSE results, (b) measures of social deprivation, (c) selection on the basis of ability or aptitude and (d) selection on the basis of ability or aptitude in neighbouring schools.

Baroness Ashton of Upholland: The available information is shown in the following table. It shows the correlations between the school value added measures and:
	(a) raw GCSE/GNVQ results; and
	(b) for maintained mainstream schools only, the percentage of pupils known to be eligible for free school meals.
	
		
			 VA measure % 5 or more grades A*–C Average GCSE/GNVQ point score % eligible for free school meals 
			 KS2 to KS3 0.72 0.66 0.61 
			   
			 KS3 to GCSE/  GNVQ 0.40 0.46 0.16 
		
	
	The pilot covered only a sample of schools and included only a very small number of schools that were selective or had neighbouring selective schools. It would therefore be inappropriate to calculate correlations separately for these schools.

School Value Added Measures

Lord Lucas: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What is the average improvement per pupil, in terms of National Curriculum levels to an accuracy of two decimal places, by pupils whose results were included in the pilot value added tables (a) from key stage 2 to key stage 3 and (b) from key stage 3 to GCSE.

Baroness Ashton of Upholland: The average improvement per pupil in terms of National Curriculum levels to an accuracy of two decimal places by pupils whose results were included in the pilot value added tables were:
	(a) from key stage 2 to key stage 3: 1.36 levels
	(b) from key stage 3 to GCSE/GNVQ: it is not possible to calculate an average improvement in terms of National Curriculum levels because there is no equivalency between National Curriculum levels and the GCSE/GNVQ point scoring system.

School Value Added Measures

Lord Lucas: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	For pilot value added tables, where the key stage 2 results have been taken from, for those pupils who did not take the key stage 2 test at the schools included in the value added pilot (particularly those pupils at independent schools not participating in key stage 2 tests) and whether those key stage 2 results were measured as whole National Curriculum levels or at a finer level of definition.

Baroness Ashton of Upholland: Most pupils change schools between key stage 2 (KS2) and key stage 3 (KS3) since KS2 tests are usually taken during the last year of primary education. The KS2 information for each pupil used in the value added calculations would therefore relate to the tests taken in their particular feeder primary school. The pilot developed and tested systems to trace the key stage 2 prior attainment information for all pupils eligible for key stage 3 assessment in 2001, using the KS2 results from 1998, i.e. three years previously.
	Any pupils for whom KS2 prior attainment information could not be traced were excluded from the value added calculations except where the current school could provide the missing details. If a pupil did not take KS2 tests and therefore had no input measure, they were also excluded from the value added calculation for their school.
	KS2 performance was measured as an average level across the three subjects of English, mathematics and science. Whole National Curriculum levels were used in the calculation of the average level.

Faith Schools

Lord Lester of Herne Hill: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When developing their policy on state funding for faith schools in England and Wales, they will have regard to the system obtaining in France, where such funding is available on condition both that the admission of pupils is not restricted on religious grounds and that the core curriculum is taught to pupils.

Baroness Ashton of Upholland: Decisions on funding the establishment of new voluntary-aided faith schools will continue to be based on a range of factors and the merits of each individual case. We have, however, made it clear that promoters of new faith schools will have to demonstrate how they will be inclusive and work in partnership with other schools when proposals come before the local school organisation committee, or schools adjudicator, for final decision. All maintained schools are required to teach the core National Curriculum. Responsibility for education policy and the funding of schools in Wales is devolved to the National Assembly for Wales.

Special Schools

Lord Pearson of Rannoch: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many special schools for children with a mental handicap (severe learning disabilities) existed in (a) 1997 and (b) now; and how many such children attended them in (a) 1997 and (b) now.

Baroness Ashton of Upholland: In January 1997 there were 348 special schools in England that were approved to make provision for pupils with severe learning difficulties, compared with 449 in January 2001.
	Information on individual pupils' disabilities is not collected centrally so there is no way of determining how many pupils with severe learning difficulties are attending special schools. These schools often make provision for pupils with several different disabilities and may not have pupils with severe learning difficulties enrolled at the school at the time of the Annual School's Census.

Foot and Mouth: Contiguous Cull in Yorkshire

Lord Jopling: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	(a) in which parishes in Thirsk to which the Secretary of State for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs referred on 12 November (HC Deb, col. 578) were 55 appeals lodged against the contiguous cull for foot and mouth disease;
	(b) in which parishes were the 29 appeals upheld by the divisional veterinary manager and the nine cases where infection was subsequently revealed;
	(c) how many cases and in which parishes in Thirsk was additional contiguous culling triggered; and involving how many animals;
	(d) where were the parishes where two infected premises were found following the rejection of appeals by the Government's veterinary staff; and
	(e) in which parishes did they lead to further culling on additional farms.(HL1487)
	 Question number missing in Hansard, possibly truncated question.

Lord Whitty: Since my right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs spoke on 12 November, more work has been done to clarify and tidy up the databases from which the information she provided was taken. The 55 appeals that she quoted were in the whole of North Yorkshire, rather than in the Thirsk area. The number of appeals upheld by the divisional veterinary manager is 26 and not 29. The following is the correct information in relation to these appeals.
	(a) The parishes where the 55 appeals were lodged against the contiguous cull were Bainbridge, Belbusk, Bishopdale, Boltby, Bolton by Bowland, Burnside, Cracoe, East/West Barnby, Embsay, Felixkirk, Fryup, Giggleswick, Gisburn, Great Fryupdale, Halton West, Hawnby, Hebden, Hetton, Hutton Mulgrave, Kepwick, Kirby Knowle, Kirby Malham, Lealholm, Linton, Lythe, Malham, Nether Silton, Over Silton, Rathmell, Rimington, Silsden, Sowerby, Sutton under Whitestonecliff, Thornton in Craven, Ugthorpe, West Bradford and Wigglesworth.
	(b) 26 appeals were upheld by the divisional veterinary manager. These were in the parishes of Bellbusk, Bishopdale, Boltby, Bolton by Bowland, Cracoe, Gisburn, Great Fryupdale, Halton West, Hebden, Kepwick, Kirby Knowle, Lealholm, Linton, Lythe, Nether Silton, Over Silton, Rathmell, Silsden, Sowerby, West Bradford and Wigglesworth.
	Of these appeals there were seven cases where infection was subsequently diagnosed and infected premises declared. These were in the parishes of Belbusk, Bishopdale, Halton West, Kepwick, Lealholm, Linton and Nether Silton.
	(c) In three of these seven cases there were no dangerous contacts or contiguous premises. In relation to the other four cases, culling was triggered in the parishes of Bainbridge, Bishopdale, Cracoe, Fryup, Glaisdale, Grassington, Kirby Sigston, Knayton, Linton, Nether Silton, Over Silton and Thoralby and a total of 581 cattle and 7,839 sheep were culled.
	(d) Infection was confirmed in four cases following the rejection of appeals by the Government's veterinary staff in North Yorkshire and infected premises were confirmed in the parishes of Felixkirk, Kepwick, Lealholm and Sutton under Whitestonecliff.
	(e) Two of these four cases led to further culling on farms in the parishes of Bagby, Borrowby, Felixkirk, Great Fryupdale, Lealholm, Sandhutton, South Kilvington, Sowerby and Sutton.

Foot and Mouth Slaughter Policy: Legal Challenge

The Countess of Mar: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	On how many occasions the legality of decisions of Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food or Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs officials to slaughter livestock was challenged by animal owners during the recent outbreak of foot and mouth disease.

Lord Whitty: Defra headquarters has been involved in, or made aware of, 131 cases where animal owners challenged decisions to slaughter livestock. Not all were challenged on the legality of the decision. Information is currently being sought from the regions on additional cases that were dealt with locally so that a full picture can be established.

Foot and Mouth: Imported Meat

Lord Vinson: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Given that over the past 12 months the United Kingdom has imported meat from six countries with endemic foot and mouth disease, subject only to local veterinary inspection prior to slaughter and inspection at the United Kingdom border, whether they are seeking similar arrangements in respect of the export of meat by the United Kingdom.

Lord Whitty: All six countries in question control foot and mouth disease (FMD) by means of a vaccination programme. As a result, the EU maintains demanding conditions for the importation of meat from those countries in accordance with internationally recognised standards. These conditions go far beyond veterinary inspection prior to slaughter and among other things require the farm of origin and the slaughterhouse to be in an area free from cases of FMD and require any meat exported to be matured for a specified period and de-boned before dispatch. Pigmeat cannot be imported from these countries.
	Although the conditions under which we may currently export meat are also demanding, we can expect them to be removed once we are considered free of FMD. We will then be able to approach third countries to ask them to accept UK meat in accordance with the accepted international standards for a country free of FMD. Restrictions due to BSE will continue to limit exports of beef.

Refrigerators: Disposal

Lord Greaves: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When EC Regulation 2037/2000, in its draft form, was first amended to make the recovery and treatment of HCFC-containing foam in refrigerators mandatory; and when this amendment was first known to the Government.

Lord Whitty: The European Commission's proposal for an EC Regulation on substances that deplete the ozone layer published in August 1998 did not include mandatory recovery of ozone depleting substances from refrigerators and other equipment, including rigid foams. It proposed that such recovery was only to take place "if practicable". Following discussion by officials in Environment Working Group in November 1998, the Presidency proposed an amendment to the draft regulation to make recovery of ozone depleting substances mandatory but specifically excluding domestic refrigerators and removing the reference to foams. Since Germany, Luxembourg, Finland, Sweden and the Netherlands objected to the exclusion of refrigerators, the Presidency proposed a further amendment to make recovery from such equipment mandatory from 1 January 2002. The amendment did not reinstate the reference to foams. The Council of Environment Ministers in December 1998 reached political agreement on the regulation as amended.
	The amendment to the draft regulation was formally adopted as part of the common position reached at the Environment Council meeting in February 1999. Following this it became clear that there were different views between member states on the effect of the draft regulation in respect of the need to recover chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) and hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs) from insulating foam in domestic refrigeration. The UK Government's interpretation was that the amended article only required ozone-depleting substances used as refrigerants to be recovered. Between 1999 until mid-2001, the UK, at the request of the refrigeration and foams industries, sought a definitive legal interpretation from the Commission. In the meantime the new regulation was adopted by the European Parliament and Council in June 2000 and became EC Regulation 2037/2000.
	In February 2000, the Commission circulated a table of clarifications which included an interpretation of the requirement in the regulation to remove CFCs and HCFCs from refrigeration equipment. It stated that this requirement did not cover foams in commercial refrigeration as "it was the Commission's understanding that the clarification proposed here is in line with the intention of the Council during the negotiations of the new Regulation". As the effect on domestic refrigerators was not settled, officials raised the issue at the EC Management Committee meeting on the implementation of the regulation on ozone depleting substances in March and again in October 2000. In October it was agreed that foam containing CFCs was classified as a "product" rather than a "controlled subtance" and therefore recovery of ozone depleting substances from commercial refrigeration need only be done "if practicable". However, as some member states emphasised the practicality of effective recovery from fridges the issue of recovery of CFC from foam in domestic refrigerators remained unclear. But in June 2001 the European Commission provided a final interpretation that Regulation 2037/2000 did in fact require the recovery of controlled substances from the insulating foam of domestic refrigerators.

Defra Website: Environment Section

Lord Greaves: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When they intend to update the environment pages of the Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs website which were last updated on 25 June; and whether it is their policy to keep these pages up to date.

Lord Whitty: It is the policy of the department to keep all of the information on its website up to date. Pages within the environment section of the site have been updated since 25 June wherever appropriate. It is only the initial page linking material from Defra's predecessor departments which has remained unchanged since 25 June. Our aim is to integrate these pages more fully as part of an overall review of the department's website, at which point this link page will be removed.

Genetically Modified Salmon

Lord Moran: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by Baroness Hayman on 14 March about genetically modified salmon (WA 96), whether they have received clarification from the United States authorities and have been able to consider the problem further; and, if so, whether they are confident that the risk of irreversible damage to the wild Atlantic salmon has been removed.

Lord Whitty: No information has yet been received from the United States authorities. As soon as this is available we will consider the matter further.

Incinerator Bottom Ash

Baroness Howe of Idlicote: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether, as processed incinerator bottom ash is used as an aggregate substitute for road base, they have now concluded that this process can be classified as "recycling" in the same way as the similar use of crushed glass cullet (CGC) is so classified.

Lord Whitty: The Government consider waste to be recycled if it has been subjected to a recycling process, ie, has been reprocessed in a production process for the original purpose or for other purposes. When the incinerator bottom ash has gone through such a process, the Government would consider that the ash has been recycled.

Foot and Mouth: European Parliament Inquiry

Lord Inglewood: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they support the European Parliament holding a committee of inquiry into the outbreak of foot and mouth disease across Europe in 2001; and, if so, why.

Lord Whitty: It is for the European Parliament to take its own decisions on whether it wishes to set up a committee to inquire into the foot and mouth disease outbreak. We understand that this will be a temporary committee rather than a committee of inquiry, but the Parliament has yet to take a final decision.

Fisheries Grant-in-aid

Lord Moran: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will act on the recommendation of the Salmon and Freshwater Fisheries Review that they should provide a substantial increase in fisheries grant-in-aid by increasing the additional £3 million announced in December 2000 and restoring fisheries grant-in-aid to at least the 1992 level.

Lord Whitty: In their formal response to the Salmon and Freshwater Fisheries Review Group report, the Government accepted the recommendation to substantially increase fisheries grant-in-aid to the Environment Agency and announced an increase of £3 million in England for the financial years 2002–03 and 2003–04. For each of these years grant-in-aid will be set at £6.2 million.
	Levels of grant-in-aid for the years 2004–05 and 2005–06 will be determined in the light of the outcome of the current spending review, to be completed in 2002.

E-enabled Whole Farm Plans

Baroness Byford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether, against the background of foot and mouth disease and falling rural incomes, they intend to offer grants to farmers in order that they can establish appropriate computer links to Whitehall to comply with the request by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs that they should produce "e-enabled whole farm plans"; and
	Whether the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs' proposal that farmers should produce "e-enabled whole farm plans" is compliant with the Human Rights Act 1998 and the Data Protection Act 1998; and
	To what extent the viability of the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs' proposal that farmers should produce "e-enabled whole farm plans" is dependent upon delivery of broadband computer links to rural areas.

Lord Whitty: As mentioned in the Oral Answer of 26 November (Official Report, col. 8), the Government and Policy Commission are considering many options to help build a sustainable modern, farming industry. E-enabled whole farm plans are among them. The details mentioned are among many which would need to be addressed before this particular option could be pursued. No decisions will be taken before we have received the recommendations of the Policy Commission or without full consultation with stakeholders.

Defra Press Release

Baroness Byford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Why the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs news release dated 30 November was not delivered to the House of Lords Shadow Environment, Food and Rural Affairs spokesman until 4.30 pm on 4 December.

Lord Whitty: Defra press office issued three press releases on Friday 30 November. These documents are customarily sent from the press office by first-class post to noble Lords who have requested them. It is possible that the envelope was not sent until the evening of Monday 3 December.

Mountain, Moorland, Heath and Down

Baroness Byford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How they define mountain, moorland, heath and down; and how this definition is being interpreted with regard to the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000.

Lord Whitty: Section 1(2) of the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 defines "mountain, moor, heath or down" as excluding any land which appears to the Countryside Agency or the Countryside Council for Wales to consist of improved or semi-improved grassland. Subject to that qualification, the Act defines "mountain" as including any land which is more than 600 metres above sea level.
	The duty to prepare maps of open country (mountain, moor, heath, or down) and registered common land lies with the two countryside bodies. The Countryside Agency's criteria for identifying mountain, moor, heath and down are set out in its published mapping methodology which explains in detail how the agency will approach the task of preparing the maps. The methodology summarises the characteristics of each of the land types which comprise open country as follows:
	Mountain — all land over 600 metres above sea level and other upland areas comprising rugged and steep land, crag, scree, fell, or other bare rock and associated rough vegetation. It does not include coastal cliffs. It includes semi-natural upland vegetation, but does not include agriculturally improved or semi-improved grassland. It may include areas of bracken, scattered trees, open water, rivers, streams, bogs, mires, bare peat, or a mosaic of these.
	Moor — land usually of an open character with semi-natural vegetation such as; mires (including blanket bog), heaths, rough unimproved acid grassland, and upland calcareous grassland. It does not include agriculturally improved or semi-improved grassland, but may include areas of unimproved bent-fescue grassland, scattered trees, scrub, bracken, open water, rivers, streams, bare peat, rock outcrops or other bare ground, or a mosaic of these. Moor usually occurs in upland areas but may also be found in lowland areas.
	Heath — land of a generally open character, usually characterised by natural ericaceous dwarf shrubs. Heath usually occurs in lowland areas on nutrient poor soils. The typical vegetation types are heathers, gorse, bilberry, mires, scrub, unimproved grassland, and bracken. It does not include agriculturally improved or semi-improved grassland, but may include areas of scattered or dense naturally regenerating trees, open water, rivers, streams, carr, sand or other bare ground, or a mosaic of these.
	Down — land comprising semi-natural grassland in areas of chalk or limestone geology generally within an open landscape. The typical vegetation type is unimproved grassland often with scattered scrub. It does not include agriculturally improved or semi-improved grassland, but may include areas of scattered trees, dwarf shrubs, streams, springs, or a mosaic of these.

Water: Access for Recreation

Baroness Crawley: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When the findings of the research contract about access to water for sport and recreation will be published.

Lord Whitty: We will be publishing the research report on Friday 21 December. The research provides information about availability of water space, the effectiveness of current arrangements in meeting the demand for different types of water-based sport and recreation and the scale and nature of potential demand. We shall be looking carefully at the findings to decide what action may be needed. A copy of the report will be placed in the Libraries of both Houses.

Nitrates Directive

Baroness Thornton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What progress is being made in England in meeting the United Kingdom's legal obligations to implement the 1991 Nitrates Directive.

Lord Whitty: Following the decision by the European Court of Justice that the United Kingdom has failed to comply with the Nitrates Directive, my right honourable friend the Secretary of State will be issuing a consultation document to key organisations very shortly setting out proposals for implementing the Nitrates Directive in England. The consultation will get underway in earnest in the new year, when a summary version of the consultation document will be sent to all farmers in England seeking their views on the implementation options. The consultation document includes an outline of the help available from Defra for farmers to meet the cost of compliance.

Foot and Mouth Inquiries

Lord Northbrook: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will hold a full public inquiry into the foot and mouth outbreak in order to rectify any administrative and practical faults revealed by the recent crisis.

Lord Whitty: We are committed to having a rigorous, independent investigation of the issues quickly and efficiently.
	On 9 August the Government announced two independent inquiries into the foot and mouth outbreak—the Royal Society Study chaired by Sir Brian Follett and the lessons learned inquiry chaired by Ian Anderson. The formal start of the Anderson inquiry was announced on 17 December.

Podiatrists

Earl Howe: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What assessment they have made of the number of unregistered podiatrists who are likely to be admitted to the new register of the health professions council without being required to undertake additional training.

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: This is a matter for the new council.

Podiatrists

Earl Howe: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether representatives of non-state registered podiatrists will be invited to serve on (a) the statutory committees and (b) the non-statutory committees of the health professions council.

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: Membership of its committees is a matter for the health professions council.

Primary Care: Ethnic Monitoring

Lord Chan: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether ethnic monitoring will be introduced in primary care so that National Health Service professionals will know who are their patients and potential patients.

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: There are currently no plans to make ethnic monitoring mandatory in primary care. However, the Department of Health has, through sponsorship of pilot projects, developed several examples of good practice in primary care race equality monitoring, including ethnicity, and has encouraged the sharing of this experience. Primary care trusts (PCTs) and primary care groups, through their work in developing local health improvement and modernisation plans (HIMPs), continue to play a pivotal role in ensuring the diversity of local needs, including those of minority ethnic groups, are identified. With the shift in the balance of power to the frontline and the formation of strategic health authorities, PCTs will from next year lead the development of local HIMPs and be the main focus for partnership working with key stakeholders. HIMPs inform local healthcare professionals on the concerns and priorities within a community of all local agencies as well as the public and patients who use NHS services. The Race Relations (Amendment) Act will also require PCTs to monitor the implementation of policies and programmes to ensure they meet the needs of ethnic minorities and promote good race relations between different racial groups. The Government's overall strategy to improve the nation's health will lead to a more positive effect on minority ethnic health.

Refugees with Medical and Nursing Qualifications

Lord Chan: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What efforts have been made to identify refugees with medical and nursing qualifications; and whether they will take steps to incorporate them in the National Health Service.

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: The NHS Plan holds a commitment to provide extra staff to the National Health Service, and the Government believe that it makes moral and economic sense to use the skills of doctors and nurses in the refugee community to the best advantage of the NHS.
	The Government have funded the Refugee Council to set up and run a database for refugee doctors. Registration is voluntary but doctors on it will receive targeted counselling and career advice. There are plans to run similar initiatives for other health professions.
	The Government have been instrumental in removing some of the bureaucratic and financial barriers so that refugees can access the training opportunities they need to succeed in the NHS. Further funding has been made available to various projects designed to help refugee health professionals requalify and start work in the NHS, and a steering group has been set up to allocate this funding and co-ordinate such initiatives. Around £500,000 is available for a range of projects throughout the country, some of which have received funding already and others will receive decisions on bids shortly.

NHS: Cost Pressures

Baroness Noakes: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they have carried out any studies into the sources of cost pressures on the National Health Service for 2001–02; and whether they will publish their findings.

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: The Government routinely assess the cost pressures on the National Health Service as part of the annual planning process. The assessment is done by an analysis of past trends in cost pressures and discussions with the National Health Service to estimate the impact of new cost pressures. In 2001–02, funding included provision for the following cost pressures on the National Health Service: pay awards of around 3.9 per cent. on average; other pay pressures such as the new contract for junior doctors and the introduction of cost of living supplements for some staff living in the South of England; non-pay inflation in the National Health Service which is above the level of general inflation; growth in prescribing costs of around 10 per cent., made up of trend growth, the additional impact of appraisals made by the National Institute of Clinical Excellence and the implementation of national service frameworks.
	All these cost pressures were fully funded. They are national assumptions and the exact costs will vary from area to area.

NHS: Overseas Referrals

Lord Bruce of Donington: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What plans they have for the NHS to commission treatment overseas for NHS patients.

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: In the light of recent rulings of the European Court of Justice, we announced that we would amend the National Health Service Act 1977 to enable the NHS to commission treatment within the European Economic Area (EEA). We will make regulations shortly. We will also take this opportunity to permit NHS bodies to commission care from outside the EEA where it is in the patient's best interest to do so. We nonetheless expect that the overwhelming majority of referrals, where they occur, will be to countries of the EEA.
	Regulations will also be made shortly to amend the National Health Service (Travelling Expenses and Remission of Charges) Regulations 1988 to permit NHS bodies to pay for the travel of NHS patients going overseas for treatment funded by the NHS. The NHS will meet the cost of the patient's travel from the point at which they begin their international journey (the airport, ferry port or international train station) to the foreign provider. Reimbursement of travel expenses between the patient's home to the airport, ferry port or international train station will be governed by the same rules that currently apply to payment of travelling expenses to hospitals in England. This change will ensure that patients treated overseas under the auspices of the NHS will not be disadvantaged by having to travel further for that treatment.

Peers: Access to Ministers

Lord Trefgarne: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether Members of the House of Lords enjoy the same right of access to Ministers as do Members of the House of Commons.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: Yes.